Peter Wilson asked:
>But I am still left wondering whether a plain 700 author added entry
>is allowable under RDA ...
Why not do a 700$a$t?
Apart from illustrators of children's material, relationship
designators are not core. You could do 700$a$econtributor I suppose,
but why?
Unless the cont
aturday, November 23, 2013 12:05 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Added access point for one name in a work that is a
compilation of works
Pete,
Working in Germany, I can't see the full OCLC record either, but I know exactly
what you mean as this is a question which
behalf of J. McRee Elrod [m...@slc.bc.ca]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:29 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Added access point for one name in a work that is a
compilation of works
Pete Wilson posted:
>This ... is conference proceedings, and has two statements
Pete,
Working in Germany, I can't see the full OCLC record either, but I know
exactly what you mean as this is a question which has bothered me for
some time, as well.
In fact, I've brought the same point up twice on this list before (oh
dear, it seems I'm repeating myself...). Read up these
Pete Wilson posted:
>This ... is conference proceedings, and has two statements of
>responsibility, one for a compiler (i.e. editor of compilation)
>and one for 20 authors, which has been= shortened in the 245 $c to
>one name "and 19 others."
We don't catalogue on OCLC. You would have to cut. p
5 matches
Mail list logo
